Rock, Paper, Shotgun - Why The Problem With Diablo Isn’t Diablo.We have to demand a standard of quality and dedication from these things. If we try to paint complaints about Diablo III’s loudly reverberating server-side-down bellyflop as entirely immature, wrong, and entitled, we’re basically saying, “Look, everyone else! We’re totally OK with this.” I mean, Diablo III’s almost assuredly sold millions of units by this point. If widespread rage then proves relatively short-lived, I have to imagine that looks like pretty much all upside to, say, Tim Willits or even devs/pubs whose intentions aren’t quite so benevolent or design-focused. Piggy banks are happy, and customers are happy. What more do you need?

Bhruic wrote on May 18, 2012, 15:00:Again, despite prevailing opinions here, publishers aren't completely stupid. They know when they've got a smash-hit on their hands (something like Diablo 3), and when they've got something that's just going to be successful. If your game doesn't already have people salivating over buying it, throwing extra impediments in like requiring "always online" can drive away sales.

You're assuming that the large majority of game buyers have the ability to resist their own impulse. Like I said, all you need to do is put in something shiny.

"OH LOOK, in D3 you can talk to a friend, and then he can join your game instantly! That makes it all worth it!"

So the next id game will undoubtedly allow you to talk to a friend, and then he can join your game instantly, and then you can both have lag while you're in the same room. And if you're really lucky, maybe the game will be up for eighty-FIVE percent on launch day! Progress!

I'm basically missing out on what sounds like an enjoyable game over a single game feature. At some point I'm going to ask myself if it's still worth it, and who knows what I'll decide at that point? At what point does it become a futile protest that's only punishing myself?

I dunno, man. At what point does something shiny become more important than something you believe is wrong?

That logic always struck me as suspect. It's like voting, people say "if you didn't vote, you don't have a right to complain". If millions of people vote, does my one vote really matter?

In the US with its horseshit "electoral college" crap, probably not. In any normal country where elections simply go by who had the most votes, it's possible. Heck, in 2000, if you lived in Dade County, your one vote might have put Al Gore in the Oval Office.

In the same vein, does my not buying Diablo 3 really have any impact?

To Blizzard? None whatsoever. To the PC game world going to shift more and more to always-online bullshit? None whatsoever.

To YOU? I dunno. Again, to what extent is not supporting something you believe is wrong more important than a "fun game?"

Saying it's suspect logic is kind of avoiding the question. You cannot control what the masses do. The masses simply have no impulse control, and they'll buy whatever is shiny, no matter how fucked up they make it. All you can do is decide for yourself what's important. So that five years down the road, when the large majority sits there and bitches that game XYZ is always-online for no fucking purpose whatsoever, you can either say "Well, you kind of have yourself to thank for that, fellas." or you can join in the bitching while deep down inside you know you were partially to blame for it, because you happily bought into the start of the scheme, because it is Diablo!

At the end of the day, people are spending their $60 and getting a game that they enjoy playing out of it.

And this is the kind of shit they say: (posted from an RPS commenter)

Before I say I’m having a blast with the game, let me say that I am LIVID about the always-on DRM, I’m getting LAG when playing single player or playing with my roomate on a LAN, and that is just DUMB. Its so arrogant that Blizzard thinks they can force this on us, and then now other companies will think its okay and they can get away with it. Its hostile to their own customers! I never expected the issues would be as bad as they are though, Error37 will hopefully wake everybody up to how dumb DRM really can be. Diablo3, AAA game, completely unplayable on launch day? The launch day they hyped up so much? On May 15th, you can…. watch a login screen. Super fail, Blizzard. I knew the company’s quality was taking a hit with Activision over their shoulder, but wow, this is beyond bad.

However, the game itself I find to be completely brilliant.

I wish there was a way to strangle little fucktards across the Internet.

So yeah, you can get Diablo, and you can be annoyed at all the horseshit while still playing a fun game. (and you can join the ranks of retards like the one I just quoted).

Or you can simply wait and give money to a dev that builds games like these WITHOUT the horseshit always-on DRM. Like Torchlight 2.

Or you can do both. Or you can do neither. Nobody can tell you what to do. In the end, it's what you choose is important for yourself. Will it make a difference? Probably not. Hell, I can say that it's 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% likely that it won't make a difference whatsoever.

But if and when you do buy it, please don't join the retard crowd who will come around and fucking bitch and moan over game XYZ being always-online. At least spare yourself that indignity.